SynthesisScientific reports2026
Orally derived mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of vascular diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Orally derived mesenchymal stem cells (OMSCs) are an emerging source of cells for treating vascular diseases (VDs). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, for the first time, we reviewed the published preclinical studies that examined the potential of OMSCs and their secretome in treating VDs, focusing on their efficacy and therapeutic mechanism. We electronically searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, from the inception of the databases to December 31, 2024, for relevant literature from peer-reviewed journals. The studies focused on treating VDs in animal models using the OMSC-based strategy were included in the review. The articles were classified by disease, injury model, and outcome. A meta-analysis of the OMSC treatment effects on the cerebral ischemia (CI) infarct volume was conducted using random-effects and fixed-effects models. Forty-one studies were included and classified by type: CI, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE), myocardial ischemia (MI), hindlimb ischemia (HI), and others. Each study presented varying degrees of evidence that OMSCs had positive biological and functional effects on the treatment outcomes of VDs, mainly via paracrine effects. Pooled analysis showed that the effect of OMSC treatment compared with control on infarct volume was − 2.19 (95% confidence interval: − 3.01, − 1.37, p < 0.01) with the random-effects model and − 1.87 (95% confidence interval: − 2.44, − 1.29, p < 0.01) with the fixed-effects model. These results showed that OMSCs can significantly reduce the infarct volume in animal models of CI. Overall, OMSCs show promising potential for treating VDs mainly because of their secretome. However, before moving on to clinical trials, more high-quality preclinical studies with detailed analyses of possible off-target effects are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.